By Kevin Harris
There is a difference between being politically aggressive and being politically prepared. There is a difference between commanding attention and commanding respect. And there is a very important difference between being an effective opposition parliamentarian and being capable of leading a major political party.
The Free National Movement must not confuse the three.
Anyone seriously suggesting that Long Island MP Dr. Andre Rollins should become the next leader of the FNM is, in my view, displaying more political desperation than political vision. Rollins may be an energetic parliamentarian. He may be confrontational, unpredictable and willing to challenge his opponents at every opportunity. But none of those characteristics, by themselves, qualify a person to lead the Free National Movement.
The FNM is not a political toy.
It is a historic political organization whose story has been defined by struggle, sacrifice, resilience, defeat, recovery and victory. It is a party that has wandered through the political wilderness and found its way back to the mountaintop. Its history is filled with men and women who sacrificed personally and politically for what they believed was a better Bahamas.
That history deserves to be respected when the question of leadership arises.
The FNM has been blessed with leaders and statesmen such as the Rt. Hon. Hubert Alexander Ingraham, the Most Hon. Dr. Hubert Alexander Minnis, Sir Cecil Wallace-Whitfield, Sir Kendal Isaacs, Sir Orville Turnquest, Sir Arthur Foulkes, Sir Cornelius A. Smith, Dame Janet Bostwick, Frank Watson, O.A.T. “Tommy” Turnquest, Roma Italia Johnson, the late Theresa Moxey-Ingraham, the late Tennyson Wells, Brent Symonette, Desmond Bannister, Carl W. Bethel, Dion Foulkes, Zhivargo Laing, and many others.
These individuals were not perfect. None of them should be placed beyond criticism. But they understood that political leadership is bigger than winning an argument in Parliament or generating headlines.
It requires vision.
It requires discipline.
It requires temperament.
It requires the ability to bring people together when the natural instinct of a political party is to tear itself apart.
And above all, it requires the capacity to inspire confidence in people who may not necessarily agree with you.
The FNM Knows What Leadership Looks Like
The Free National Movement has produced two Prime Ministers to date: the Rt. Hon. Hubert Alexander Ingraham and the Most Hon. Dr. Hubert Alexander Minnis.
Whatever their subsequent political disagreements or personal falling-out, both men achieved the highest political office in the country and left their respective marks on the Bahamas.
Ingraham, in particular, remains the only living Bahamian Prime Minister to have won three non-consecutive general elections.
That is not political trivia. It is evidence of what disciplined political organization, strategic leadership and electoral endurance can accomplish.
The FNM knows the bitter taste of defeat. It also knows the intoxicating taste of victory.
It knows what it is like to be dismissed, underestimated and written off.
And it knows how to fight its way back.
That is precisely why the present leadership conversation deserves more seriousness than simply asking who can make the most noise in Parliament.
The Pintard Question
There is no denying that the FNM is experiencing a period of political uncertainty.
Since Michael Pintard assumed leadership following the party’s November 2021 leadership race, the FNM has endured significant electoral setbacks, including by-election defeats and the loss of the most recent general election. Pintard subsequently secured another mandate at the party’s 2024 convention.
He came into office promising to unify the organization and bring the various factions of the FNM together.
Yet the uncomfortable truth is that the party remains deeply unsettled.
There is now increasing discussion within FNM circles about whether Pintard should continue as leader. Some of the voices questioning his leadership, I am told, are coming from individuals who were once among his strongest supporters.
Politics can be unforgiving.
Those who applaud you today can demand your resignation tomorrow.
If the FNM ultimately decides that Michael Pintard should leave the leadership, that is a matter for the party’s constitutional processes and its membership to determine. If he resigns, is removed through a properly constituted convention, or faces a duly authorized challenge through the party’s Central Council, the FNM will then have a much more consequential question to answer:
Who comes next?
That question should not be answered in haste.
I Saw the Rollins Question Coming
Several weeks before the May 12 general election, I publicly warned Michael Pintard against nominating Andre Rollins.
My concern was straightforward: if Rollins won Long Island, I believed his political ambitions could eventually collide with Pintard’s leadership.
Rollins won.
And since entering the House of Assembly, he has attracted considerable attention for his combative and often unconventional parliamentary style.
Some people appear to be impressed.
I am not.
There is nothing wrong with an opposition MP being aggressive. In fact, a strong opposition needs parliamentarians who will challenge the government, expose weaknesses, demand accountability and refuse to be intimidated.
But effective opposition politics and party leadership are not the same thing.
Rollins may have found a political lane that works for him. His bulldog approach may even serve the FNM well in opposition.
But the FNM should be extremely careful about mistaking parliamentary theatrics for evidence of leadership capacity.
A political leader must do more than attack.
A political leader must build.
A political leader must do more than dominate a debate.
A political leader must know how to unite people who disagree.
A political leader must do more than excite the party faithful.
A political leader must persuade the wider Bahamian electorate.
That distinction matters.
Rollins Has Earned His Seat—But That Is Not the Same as Earning the Leadership
Let me be clear: Dr. Andre Rollins was fairly elected by the people of Long Island. He earned his place in the House of Assembly, and he is entitled to represent his constituents as forcefully as he sees fit.
But winning a constituency does not automatically qualify anyone to lead a national political organization.
Nor does being a formidable parliamentary performer.
Nor does being popular among a particular faction of party supporters.
Nor does being willing to take on one’s own leader.
The FNM must ask a much bigger question:
What kind of leader does the party need to rebuild itself and eventually convince the Bahamian people to return it to government?
That answer cannot simply be Andre Rollins.
There was a reason, in my view, that some experienced political figures across the political divide were relieved when Rollins was not nominated by the FNM in 2017. His political temperament has always been a subject worthy of serious consideration.
Now that he has returned to frontline politics, the FNM should not allow excitement surrounding his parliamentary performance to obscure the bigger leadership question.
Rollins can be an effective opposition voice.
He can be a political fighter.
He can be a formidable debater.
But none of that automatically makes him a national party leader.
The FNM Must Think Beyond Pintard
This is not an argument for Michael Pintard.
It is an argument for the FNM.
If the party believes Pintard is no longer capable of leading it, then it should follow its constitutional procedures and make that determination.
But removing one leader without having a credible successor is not political strategy.
It is political frustration.
And frustration is a terrible way to choose a leader.
If Pintard eventually departs, the FNM will need to look carefully across its parliamentary caucus, its wider membership and its broader leadership base.
There are individuals inside and outside the current parliamentary caucus who deserve serious consideration.
I have my own recommendations.
But I will reserve those for another discussion.
For now, the warning is simple:
Do not rush.
The Next FNM Leader Must Be More Than a Fighter
The FNM currently serves as the official Opposition in a democratic parliamentary system.
The individual who leads the party—and potentially becomes Leader of His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition—must be capable of representing far more than the FNM’s most passionate supporters.
That person must be able to articulate the concerns of ordinary Bahamians.
They must understand government.
They must understand policy.
They must understand economics.
They must understand Parliament.
They must understand the internal mechanics of a political organization.
And they must possess the temperament to disagree without becoming consumed by confrontation.
The next FNM leader should be stable, measured, intelligent, strategic, respected, personable, politically experienced and capable of working with people who do not always agree with him or her.
That person must be able to walk into a room and command attention without demanding it.
The FNM should also take a careful look at the political temperament of the current Prime Minister, Philip “Brave” Davis. Whether one agrees with Davis or not, his political longevity and ability to maintain a broad political coalition should remind FNM supporters that winning opposition arguments is not the same as winning government.
The FNM needs a leader capable of doing both.
Don’t Put the Wrong Person in the Chair
The Free National Movement has survived too much to become desperate now.
It has known political defeat.
It has experienced internal conflict.
It has seen leaders rise and fall.
It has been declared finished before.
And yet, time and again, the party has found a way to reinvent itself.
That history should inform the current leadership debate.
So, yes, challenge Michael Pintard if you believe he has failed.
Yes, demand accountability.
Yes, debate the future of the party.
Yes, consider new leadership.
But do not elevate someone simply because he is loud, combative or capable of dominating the parliamentary floor.
The FNM needs a leader—not an audition.
Dr. Andre Rollins has earned his right to serve the people of Long Island.
He has earned his place in the House of Assembly.
He has earned the right to challenge the government.
But he has not, in my estimation, demonstrated that he has what it takes to lead the Free National Movement.
The FNM must resist the temptation to confuse political aggression with political maturity.
It must resist the temptation to substitute personality for vision.
And it must resist the temptation to choose its next leader simply because party members are frustrated with the current one.
The FNM is too important. Its history is too significant. Its future is too consequential.
The party must dig deep, think carefully and choose wisely.
Because the next FNM leader should not merely be someone who can fight the government.
The next FNM leader must be someone the Bahamian people can ultimately trust to govern the country.
And, in my view, Andre Rollins is not that person.
